§ Mr. Foulkesasked the Secretary of State for Scotland (1) if he will call for a report from the chief constable of Strathclyde as to what disciplinary action has been taken against police officers as a result of the dispute over publication of his Department's research report of sexual offences;
(2) if, in the light of the dispute between his Department and the Strathclyde police force over publication of his Department's research report on sexual offences, he will review the arrangements for the future publication of similar reports;
(3) if he will publish in the Official Report the letter he has received from the chief constable of Strathclyde relating to the dispute over publication of his Department's research report on sexual offences;
(4) if he will appoint an independent person to inquire into the dispute between his Department and the Strathclyde police force relating to the publication of his Department's research report on sexual offences; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. AncramThe arrangements for the publication of research studies conducted by the Scottish Home and Health Department into aspects of police practice are clear. The Scottish Home and Health Department first discusses with the police the scope and nature of the proposed research. It then gathers evidence, prepares a draft report based on it, consults the relevant police forces for comment on the draft, considers whether to amend the draft in the light of such comment and submits the report through me to my right hon. Friend for him—and nobody else—to decide on the question of publication. This practice was followed with regard to the study of the police investigation into complaints of sexual assault, which was duly published in 1983. My right hon. Friend sees no cause for altering this standard research practice and it will be followed in respect of any subsequent research study.
During the preparation of the sexual assaults study in 1983 Strathclyde police criticised some of the material incorporated in the draft and challenged its accuracy. The Scottish Home and Health Department was able to demonstrate that the criticism was unjustified and arose from differences between, on the one hand, a version made available to the researchers of the initial records made by the police relating to alleged assaults and, on the other hand, records of such assaults made subsequently for the Strathclyde police file and also a precognition. As I informed the House on 2 May at column 447, the differences between the material seen by the Scottish
378W
Licences issued for the prevention of serious damage to fisheries Species Number of licences Number of birds killed Location 1984 Mergansers 10 203 Lochailort, Laggan and Duich, Spean, Spey and Findharn, Conon, Awe, Alness, Dee (Aberdeenshire) Cormorants 14 505 Loch Leven, Lochailort, Doon, Laggan and Duich, Spean. Nairn, Annan, Awe, Conon, Tay, Tweed Goosanders 2 134 Tweed Home and Health Department's researchers and the material held on record by the police were readily explainable: they were minor in extent, consisting of changes in phraseology which did not in any way affect the substance. It is to the credit of the chief constable of Strathclyde that, when the matter was drawn to his notice, he investigated within his force and wrote to the Scottish Home and Health Department apologising for the unfounded criticism that had been levelled at its officers and informing the Department that he had taken appropriate action in relation to his officers who had challenged the report's accuracy. When the research study was published the quotations from the police reports which had been the subject of this correspondence appeared as in the researchers original draft. After the research study was published changes were made in police practice.
When the hon. Member and the hon. Member for Glasgow, Cathcart (Mr. Maxton) raised this matter earlier this year with my right hon. Friend, they were informed of the full circumstances and were shown the relevant reports in the two versions. They have also been shown by the chief constable the letter of apology which he sent to the Scottish Home and Health Department in 1983. This matter was resolved satisfactorily in that year and my right hon. Friend does not consider that action on the lines suggested by the hon. Member is necessary.